Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on March 18, 2006, 04:49:00 PM
-
What, exactly, is the difference?
-
Let's see, if you want to change someone's behavior or thinking you have 3 options:
Rewards- sometimes as harmful and ineffective as punishments, depends on the circumstances.
Punishment- which can, and certainly does, include isolation and physical torture.
Rewards and Punishments are both manipulative and coercive. Kids usually catch on and resent you.
Modeling and Honest Communication- slower, but the most respectful and humane approach.
-
I'll buy that "Modeling and Honest Communication" is slower, and probably respectful on at least one level,but I'm not so convinced about humane. What if the behavior you sought to change were self-harming --cutting, bashing head against wall, or other clearly physically harmful? Would you model sitting calmly, perhaps saying that calm is nicer? Or would you restrain the extreme behavior, for however short or long a time? Wouldn't restraining someone bashing their head against a wall be more humane than letting them continue?
I don't argue that there aren't abuses in programs that purport to modify behavior, and even regard "behavior mod" as quite different from therapeutic.
What about a guided wilderness experience, where a person is given all they truly need, and are taught how to do what they have to, but don't get warm food if they don't choose to start a fire and heat/cook the food? That is modeling and honest communication (as the group leaders would be in the same position regarding food), and I don't think it abusive. Some do. Do you?
And can you draw an inflexible line?
-
On 2006-03-18 16:29:00, Anonymous wrote:
...blah, blah.... for however short or long a time? Wouldn't restraining someone bashing their head against a wall be more humane than letting them continue?
Nice strawman! Got any more?
What about a guided wilderness experience, where a person is kept from family and friends?
FIXED.
I ought to get a moniker if I'm going to keep the flamewar a'cookin.
-
On 2006-03-18 16:29:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I'll buy that "Modeling and Honest Communication" is slower, and probably respectful on at least one level,but I'm not so convinced about humane. What if the behavior you sought to change were self-harming --cutting, bashing head against wall, or other clearly physically harmful? Would you model sitting calmly, perhaps saying that calm is nicer? Or would you restrain the extreme behavior, for however short or long a time? Wouldn't restraining someone bashing their head against a wall be more humane than letting them continue?
I don't argue that there aren't abuses in programs that purport to modify behavior, and even regard "behavior mod" as quite different from therapeutic.
What about a guided wilderness experience, where a person is given all they truly need, and are taught how to do what they have to, but don't get warm food if they don't choose to start a fire and heat/cook the food? That is modeling and honest communication (as the group leaders would be in the same position regarding food), and I don't think it abusive. Some do. Do you?
And can you draw an inflexible line?"
Seems like a good point. Hopeing for an honest response, whats with the strawmen statement?
-
On 2006-03-18 17:42:00, Anonymous wrote:
Seems like a good point. Hopeing for an honest response, whats with the strawmen statement?"
Responding to your own posts = Five yard penalty. Time to get your ass kicked five yards.
-
Do you know of any residential treatment centers using this approach? What are their names? Let say you are running an RTC and 180 pound Jeff slugs 130 pound Johnny. How do you handle this keeping in mind the next time Jeff does this Johnny could be in the hospital?
-
On 2006-03-18 17:49:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Do you know of any residential treatment centers using this approach? What are their names? Let say you are running an RTC and 180 pound Jeff slugs 130 pound Johnny. How do you handle this keeping in mind the next time Jeff does this Johnny could be in the hospital?"
Hmm... how about... not operating a place like that to begin with? Ever think of that, bitch?
"Ooh! I know! I know! Let's run a place where the whole point is to piss kids off! Then when they start hitting each other (instead of the staff, who they should be murdering), we can restrain them and say it was for their own good!"
Fucking retard. Get the fuck off our Internet.
Oh yeah, and bullshit carries a ten yard penalty. **BAM!!!**
Luke starts charging himself up. Electrons flow from the left side of his back to the right, waiting to be released into some unsuspecting moron programmie's body. Next time, I'm gonna fry your ass.
-
On 2006-03-18 16:29:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I'll buy that "Modeling and Honest Communication" is slower, and probably respectful on at least one level,but I'm not so convinced about humane. What if the behavior you sought to change were self-harming --cutting, bashing head against wall, or other clearly physically harmful? Would you model sitting calmly, perhaps saying that calm is nicer? Or would you restrain the extreme behavior, for however short or long a time? Wouldn't restraining someone bashing their head against a wall be more humane than letting them continue?
I don't argue that there aren't abuses in programs that purport to modify behavior, and even regard "behavior mod" as quite different from therapeutic.
What about a guided wilderness experience, where a person is given all they truly need, and are taught how to do what they have to, but don't get warm food if they don't choose to start a fire and heat/cook the food? That is modeling and honest communication (as the group leaders would be in the same position regarding food), and I don't think it abusive. Some do. Do you?
And can you draw an inflexible line?"
No one has answered your question, yet.
-
FIVE YARD PENALTY!! *BAM!*
The question's invalid, numbnuts. If one of my friends was bashing his head against the wall, I'd grab his head and ask him what the hell was going on. If it was one of you tards, I'd help you out with the head bashing. (SMASH!)
If people believed in honest communication, "wilderness camps" wouldn't exist.
-
On 2006-03-18 17:59:00, Luke Stephens wrote:
"FIVE YARD PENALTY!! *BAM!*
The question's invalid, numbnuts. If one of my friends was bashing his head against the wall, I'd grab his head and ask him what the hell was going on. If it was one of you tards, I'd help you out with the head bashing. (SMASH!)
If people believed in honest communication, "wilderness camps" wouldn't exist."
Oh, my, still no answer, though.
-
Which question, idiot?
The "guided wilderness experience" is fucking bullshit, a purely artificial situation made to look natural.
The inflexible line is where you start sending kids away to be reprogrammed or "modified". Unless you've got a bloody belt, everything before that is pretty much child's play.
I bet you jack off every day to teenagers getting abused like that, don't you?
-
On 2006-03-18 18:04:00, Luke Stephens wrote:
"Which question, idiot?
The "guided wilderness experience" is fucking bullshit, a purely artificial situation made to look natural.
The inflexible line is where you start sending kids away to be reprogrammed or "modified". Unless you've got a bloody belt, everything before that is pretty much child's play.
I bet you jack off every day to teenagers getting abused like that, don't you?"
This one:
I'll buy that "Modeling and Honest Communication" is slower, and probably respectful on at least one level,but I'm not so convinced about humane. What if the behavior you sought to change were self-harming --cutting, bashing head against wall, or other clearly physically harmful? Would you model sitting calmly, perhaps saying that calm is nicer? Or would you restrain the extreme behavior, for however short or long a time? Wouldn't restraining someone bashing their head against a wall be more humane than letting them continue?
I don't argue that there aren't abuses in programs that purport to modify behavior, and even regard "behavior mod" as quite different from therapeutic.
What about a guided wilderness experience, where a person is given all they truly need, and are taught how to do what they have to, but don't get warm food if they don't choose to start a fire and heat/cook the food? That is modeling and honest communication (as the group leaders would be in the same position regarding food), and I don't think it abusive. Some do. Do you?
And can you draw an inflexible line?
-
Heh.
Charging... charging...
I answered your question, cockblock. It is abusive, and there's no "consider" about it. There's a fat gray area, but the inflexible line comes when you start handing your own kids over to some shitbird to be "reformed" or "behaviorally modified".
Charging... charging...
Oh... and you didn't answer my question.
"I bet you jack off every day to teenagers getting abused like that, don't you?"
And the penalty is death!
BZEERRRRT!!! One full ampere of juice runs through the programmie's head for half a second. It dies instantly. Unfortunately, another one shows up immediately to replace it- they're a dime a dozen, really...
-
On 2006-03-18 18:13:00, Luke Stephens wrote:
"Heh.
Charging... charging...
I answered your question, cockblock. It is abusive, and there's no "consider" about it. There's a fat gray area, but the inflexible line comes when you start handing your own kids over to some shitbird to be "reformed" or "behaviorally modified".
Charging... charging...
Oh... and you didn't answer my question.
"I bet you jack off every day to teenagers getting abused like that, don't you?"
And the penalty is death!
BZEERRRRT!!! One full ampere of juice runs through the programmie's head for half a second. It dies instantly. Unfortunately, another one shows up immediately to replace it- they're a dime a dozen, really..."
Just what I thought, no answer.
Next.....
-
On 2006-03-18 18:16:00, the next programmie in line to die violently wrote:
Just what I thought, no answer.
Next.....
Didn't learn your lesson from the last guy, didya, bitch?
Simple answers for simple minds time.
Subjecting teenagers to "natural" environments where they can be controlled and monitored: abuse, no matter how you slice it. (And a friend of mine really wants to slice it.)
The inflexible line: Sending your kids away.
Ah, fuckit.
Charging...
-
It really would depend on the age and circumstances, but?
If I were 2 and banging my head against the wall, I think my mother should allow it. Probably won?t happen again when I realize it doesn?t get me what I wanted and hurts like hell. About two whacks should do it. If it appeared to be involuntary and chronic, and I was sustaining injury, damn straight, put a pillow between my head and the wall or hold me until I calm down, at any age. Get me a helmet and then proceed immediately to rule out any medical/ neurological problems that might cause such irrational behavior. If there was no medical/ toxicity/ neurological problems then I?d want them to explore what emotional issues or dynamics in the relationship/ family were causing such a violent, self-harming behavior. I wouldn?t want to be punished for it. Would you?
And yeh, modeling calm when someone is flipping out can be very useful. But, chances are good that if you are basically calm, reasonable, and level headed, then your kid is not going to escalate to that degree of self harm.
There is a line that programs cross- involuntary treatment.
If you invite me to the wilderness to teach me some survival skills, I can choose to build a fire or go home and cook on the stove.
When someone assumes responsibility for the care of a group of children, and are billing for that care, they are required to meet those kids basic needs.
What difference does it make if your bland oats, are dry or cooked? They aren?t required to force the kid to eat burned oats until they puke, or to force the kid to eat the excessive amount of food they ignorantly cooked, or go hungry for days because they didn?t know how to ration their supplies.
I've heard many kids complain of digestive issues after a program. Could it be the raw oats, rice and lentils and/or diets void of proper nutrition?
Reminds me of a time when we were camping. Sixteen buses and vans of young teens pulled in and set up camp. They put up their tents and built their fires to cook what their parents sent, as a number of adults circulated to provide assistance. A valuable learning experience. I observed no resistance. The kids brought what they wanted to cook. Some had hotdogs, some steaks. I venture to guess that none of them had done this before. One kid dropped his big ol round steak on the ground. He and his group had a good laugh at their awkwardness. He washed it off and threw it on the grill.
Lessons don?t have to be punitive. And kids in wilderness programs don?t have to be deprived in order to learn useful things. Its just the only method of 'treatment' some people know. Doesn?t make it the right way, and certainly not the desirable way.
What would you want?
-
My question is hypothetical. If you have been abused in an RTC then I emphasize with your pain. And I emphasize with your anger. I have written my congressman and others and asked them to HR1738. If you have been abused I urge you to seek legal help and give survivor statements. If you really want to close RTC'S then channel your anger into something more meaningful than your suggestions I forgo my constitutional right to free speach. You see that is exactly what they do at some RTC'S and now you want to use the same methods they use physical violence and restrictions of constutional liberties. How are you any better than them.
-
Deb, don't reply to that. In fact, nobody reply to that. Just leave it sit there as the second-to-last-post as a testament to infinite stupidity.
-
On 2006-03-18 16:29:00, Anonymous wrote:
What if the behavior you sought to change were self-harming --cutting, bashing head against wall, or other clearly physically harmful? Would you model sitting calmly, perhaps saying that calm is nicer?
Sorry, not that easy. Parenthood is not for wimps. If you weren't up for it, you shouldn't have spread your legs / gone for the glory.
If your kid is cutting themselves, you probably have lost some communication w/ her (I'm guessing it's a her, as boys usually do different kinds of things) You might have to go to the horrible, ugly, messy inconvenience of laying yourself open to your child enough to earn the trust to find out what the fuck is bugging her so damned much. Then "model" and explain better ways of dealing with whatever is bugging her so much.
Did I mention that it's not for wimps? Want your kid to trust you? Ok, well it works both ways.Don't worry about temptation--as you grow older, it starts avoiding you.
-- Old Farmer's Almanac
-
On 2006-03-18 17:49:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Do you know of any residential treatment centers using this approach? What are their names? Let say you are running an RTC and 180 pound Jeff slugs 130 pound Johnny. How do you handle this keeping in mind the next time Jeff does this Johnny could be in the hospital?"
Consult your higher poser, admit that you were in way, way over your head in the first place thinking you could whip a quick fix on complex life and family issues in x months for y dollars and send all the kids back to their homes where they belong. Our country right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right.
--Carl Schurz, German-born U.S. general and U.S. senator
-
Then, since it is so good to model appropriate behavior and open up yourself to find out what bothers the child, how do you do that if the child is not around. Say if the child "runs away". or stays out at night under the modeling influence of others around their own age who are using drugs, etc etc. One single person can't expect to model successfully for a whole community and effect change if more of the community exhibits other behavior and attitude. And experience suggests that peers are the greatest influence in any event.
"If you invite me to the wilderness to teach me some survival skills, I can choose to build a fire or go home and cook on the stove." In your approach, yes. But the parallel is the child can choose to walk from the parental model and follow that of the drug abusing peer, as one example. The child can continue to blame others for all the ils they face and experience, rather than experience the inescapable result of not making a fire for warm food. I guess each instance involves choice, but one doesn't let the child run from reality.
If you were able to do this far and deep enough, families would do things together, including playing basketball and camping. Lots of people are so hung up on making the next payment on the luxury home or BMW that they work for the payment rather than focus on more important things - like their family. Parents are "told" to give their kids freedom, but not how to guide them and model for them well, or even how to fit the modeling into life. What do you do when you get there and the child follows a self-destructive course?
I don't favor taking kids away from their family, but sometimes that is the better course. Puting them in a place where they may get beaten is another thing alltogether. Maybe it is a failure in parenting, though so often because the parent didn't try or didn't follow "authoritative" advice from "experts".
This won't solve the world's problems, but then neither will mindless namecalling. That there are some bad operators in an industry - say, car dealers or plumbers, or you pick one - doesn't make the industry bad. And many "programs" actually do a world of good.
(I'll bet the responses on that will be pleasant!)
-
On 2006-03-18 18:47:00, Anonymous wrote:
If you really want to close RTC'S then channel your anger into something more meaningful than your suggestions I forgo my constitutional right to free speach. You see that is exactly what they do at some RTC'S and now you want to use the same methods they use physical violence and restrictions of constutional liberties. How are you any better than them.
Your freedom of speech? Nobody moderates this particular forum. Nobody has edited, censured, banned or otherwised attempted to curtail your freedom to say whatever damned fool thing you want to say. In fact, one of the primary purposes for which I go to the trouble of hosting these forums is to let you say exactly what you think so that the whole world can see for themselves. See, for nearly 20 years I tried, occasionally to explain it to normal people and they simply didn't believe it. Thanks for your help.
I don't want to close RTC's. I just want to throw down the gauntlet to YOU, yuppie sell-out. You think RTC is such a good idea? You want to fully understand how a wilderness experience can transform a lost soul and confer enlightenment? Good idea! Honestly, it is! So then just hit the net and book a family adventure and experience at a monastary or wilderness expedition. Look into a stint w/ the Peace Corps or Habitat for Humanity. Whatever you do, never subject your kid to something you don't understand and couldn't endure yourself.
Fuckin' do good yuppie wimp!
The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics
is often very tolerant and human. But when fanatics are on top,
there is no limit to oppression.
--H.L. Mencken
_________________
fka ~ Antigen
Drug war POW
Straight, Sarasota
`80 - `82
return undef() if /coercion/i;[ This Message was edited by: Eudora on 2006-03-18 20:14 ]
-
Everything?s a fucking impossible crisis with you people.
This is one of those times where I?m inclined to say what direly want to hear. Yes, you and your child are exceptionally unique. There was no way to bridge the communication gap. You couldn?t admit your faults, because you have none. You couldn?t listen to your child because s/he wouldn?t talk to you, even though you were the perfect parent. Your happy, confident child consciously chose to associate with and follow drug abusing peers. Yes those peers destroyed his/her self esteem and forced him/her to take drugs. It couldn?t have been that s/he felt unworthy or hopeless and was looking for others to commiserate with. There was no resource or means by which to assist him/her in rekindling his/her passion, excitement, 'fire' about life. Yes, isolating your child from friends and family, subjecting him/her to forced marches in extreme weather, limited calories, no hygiene, humiliating and de-humanizing situations, name calling (you think it?s bad here?), denying medical needs, etc, etc? with absolute total strangers you know nothing about, is the most reasonable, humane, and effective means to build self esteem and hope. Excellent modeling for their own parenting, down the road. Their changed behavior couldn?t possibly have anything to do with the conditioning doled out in a fear-based environment. Yes honey, for some, there is no other option. You are exceptional. We feel your pain and confusion. Hope your child was with some truely exceptional people who helped them sort out the confustion and genuinely find some peace and understanding.
Many programs do a world of good? How many do you have direct experience with? How many have you been through? How many do you refer to?
-
"Everything?s a fucking impossible crisis with you people."
Who said crisis?
Neither I nor my child are all that unique. I have faults, but trying to be the best parent I can isn't one of them. And while my child talked to me, it wasn't about whatever led him/her to drug abuse, or lying or stealing. Oh -- I didn't modele those behaviors for him/her. Tell me then, why did s/he decide to associate with and follow drug abusing peers? Was it because I failed to bare my innermost feelings and lay my soul bare for him/her to lead them to open theirs so I could ensure they had good self-image despite negative peer influences during the school day?
"isolating your child from friends", given the type of friends - drug abusing, and in self-denial, was not such a bad idea. S/he needed new friends anyway.
"subjecting him/her to forced marches in extreme weather, limited calories, no hygiene, humiliating and de-humanizing situations, name calling ... ..." never happened.
"Hope your child was with some truely exceptional people who helped them sort out the confustion and genuinely find some peace and understanding." Thanks. That did happen, whether you believe it or not.
I'm sufficiently familiar with several programs to have confidence in what I say about them. Although I've not personally gone through them, I've discussed them openly with those who have. And I've not received a cent from anyone for referring anyone anywhere.
-
Lady/Sir: you should have to go through one of these programs you seem so proud of. Bet you wouldn't last one week, WHIMPY!
-
On 2006-03-19 07:30:00, Anonymous wrote:
""Everything�s a fucking impossible crisis with you people."
Who said crisis?
Neither I nor my child are all that unique. I have faults, but trying to be the best parent I can isn't one of them. And while my child talked to me, it wasn't about whatever led him/her to drug abuse, or lying or stealing. Oh -- I didn't modele those behaviors for him/her. Tell me then, why did s/he decide to associate with and follow drug abusing peers? Was it because I failed to bare my innermost feelings and lay my soul bare for him/her to lead them to open theirs so I could ensure they had good self-image despite negative peer influences during the school day?
"isolating your child from friends", given the type of friends - drug abusing, and in self-denial, was not such a bad idea. S/he needed new friends anyway.
"subjecting him/her to forced marches in extreme weather, limited calories, no hygiene, humiliating and de-humanizing situations, name calling ... ..." never happened.
"Hope your child was with some truely exceptional people who helped them sort out the confustion and genuinely find some peace and understanding." Thanks. That did happen, whether you believe it or not.
I'm sufficiently familiar with several programs to have confidence in what I say about them. Although I've not personally gone through them, I've discussed them openly with those who have. And I've not received a cent from anyone for referring anyone anywhere.
"
Karen I thought you were done with fornits? :rofl:
-
(I'll bet the responses on that will be pleasant!)
You are a troll. ::troll::
-
I understand the desire for anonymity, but is it possible that each anon could have a number or something? Simply for the sake of clarity, I think it would be good if there was some way to label the posts, especially when 2 or more anon's are arguing, it tends to get pretty confusing. They could still be anonymous and not have to set up an account or recieve pm's, I just think it would be to everyone's advantage if all the posts from an ip address had some kind of tag just so we know they're from the same poster.
-
The reality is that a lot of times kids are forced into residential treatment by the courts. So there is no option to bring the child home. The question was meant to see how to take the theory of modeling and honest communication and see how that would apply in a residential setting with a given set of realistic circumstances.
-
First of all my comments about freedom of speech wasn't directed at you or this website. Second I never made a statement with a judgement about RTCS. I never made a statement at all about Wilderness Programs. Don't presume to know anthing about me. I might be homeless, using a library, a yuppie, or extreamly wealthy. The acrimony of your hysteria is a real turnoff to parents looking to this site to get information.
-
Don't presume to know anthing about me. I might be homeless, using a library, a yuppie, or extreamly wealthy. The acrimony of your hysteria is a real turnoff to parents looking to this site to get information.
Hi Karen! :wave: Since we don't know anything about you, why don't you tell us more about yourself?
-
On 2006-03-19 14:31:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Don't presume to know anthing about me. I might be homeless, using a library, a yuppie, or extreamly wealthy. The acrimony of your hysteria is a real turnoff to parents looking to this site to get information.
Hi Karen! :wave: Since we don't know anything about you, why don't you tell us more about yourself?"
Yeah, you do write a lot like Karen.
You aren't homeless, you aren't using a library, and you aren't extremely wealthy.
You're middle class, you went to college, you were in the college bound track in high school, you're a devotee of pop psychology (although you don't consider yourself one), and you had teachers who rewarded pompous writing. Your IQ is between 116 and 140---most likely around 126. You most likely scored between 1100 and 1250 on your SATs--1300, max. Although your intelligence is between above average and gifted, when you meet new people you are likely to assume you're smarter than they are--far more often than you should.
The college you went to was better than a community college and probably had competitive admissions, but wasn't Ivy League.
You're most likely between thirty and fifty. You're white collar, but you don't work in science or engineering.
You're a program parent or an ed con. From various bits of information from your post I can tell that you are not staff, a program owner, just a program relative, a former program kid, a journalist, or an interested bystander. That just leaves program parent, which other bits of information from you post confirms.
Word choices tell a lot about a person. If they didn't, characterization would be a whole lot harder.
Don't presume you don't give away a lot about yourself just by how you say what you say.
I won't necessarily have gotten all of that right, but I'm sure I pegged you on most of it.
The only other thing you could be is a professional writer, like me, who is (unlike me) pretending to be an anonymous program parent. Not likely.
Julie
-
Hi Julie
My name is not Karen, that I can assure you. I am not a program parent or program kid. I have owned and operated my own businesses for the last 20 years. I have expertise in rare books. I have two graduate degrees, one from an Ivy League College. I was also a high school flunkout so I worked before going to college. My first job as after grad school was in a drug rehab TC. That was enough experience for me to understand that I never wanted to work for anyone else again.
IQ measures a very small range of cognitive abilities and is highly correlated with SAT scores. It doesn't measure creativity, emotional intelligence, and a range of talents. IQ scores often fluctuate two standard deviations depending on when it is given in persons life. It is an appropriate part in a diagnostic series in context with other factors.
I did spend some time reviewing the literature including reading the evidence that the Wilderness Therapy Association provided. There is not one study with a control group. So fundamentally they have absolutely no evidence that wilderness therapy changes behavior. The same type of gains they claimed on the Youth Activity Questionaire were achieved by the Salt Lake City DYFS with 12 therapy sessions. And this questionaire was normed using kids in Austrailia. And the results are published by a biased organization. On the other hand the surgeon general report is generally considered to be unbiased. There are nine studies referenced, which isn't very many, but at least they are published in respected journals. There conclusion is that there is no current evidence that treatment in either TC'S or Wilderness Camp on institutional recidivism. Family Therapy, Multi Systemic Therapy and community mental health are the modalities of choice. In short, keep the pups home.
Ancedotaly, I have been through all that bad boy stuff (I was not a pleasant adolescent) and managed to get through quite nicely, as did my friends and dorm buds.Kids need experience making better choices in the communities they live in, not thousands of miles from home in an artificial enivironment. This has always been my inclination. I glad that I found that the research is on my side.
As to Eudora's comment that I couldn't get through a Wilderness Program, when I was in high school I wrestled at a championship level and that is more physically demanding than than wilderness programs. That is lots exercise, a lot of times in rubber sweatsuits, extreamly limited calorie intake, laxitives, puking, with lots of stairs to climb if you didn't make weight. Oh' and lots of restraining. Some people like physical challanges. The reasons for not sending someone to a WC has nothing to do with what I could or couldn't do. It is that there is no evidence that this modality has any effect on behavior. The marketing of these programs is extremly dangerous because their are no inpectors and it is easy for a parent to make the mistake of sending a child into an unscrupulous program. Physical challanges will do harm to a percentage of those who go. Family therapy, and community mental health have evidence based research that suggest they are better alternatives. Now it's time to go on Woodbury's parent forum and tell them that the evidence suggests that the parents are wasting their money. I wonder how long it will be before he kicks me off.
-
On 2006-03-25 13:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
As to Eudora's comment that I couldn't get through a Wilderness Program, when I was in high school I wrestled at a championship level
If it weren't so tragic, that would be funny as hell. You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.
Take your camping/sports wrestling and put it in the context life under incarceration ( http://www.prisonexp.org (http://www.prisonexp.org) ), adding the ever potent element of uncertain duration and the fact that it's real and your own damned parents ordered and paid for it.
If you can wrap your mind around just that much, then we'll have enough comon ground to start talking the same language. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was
made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions.
There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to
govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be
masters.
--Daniel Webster
-
On 2006-03-25 13:39:00, Eudora wrote:
"
On 2006-03-25 13:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
As to Eudora's comment that I couldn't get through a Wilderness Program, when I was in high school I wrestled at a championship level
If it weren't so tragic, that would be funny as hell. You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.
Take your camping/sports wrestling and put it in the context life under incarceration ( http://www.prisonexp.org (http://www.prisonexp.org) ), adding the ever potent element of uncertain duration and the fact that it's real and your own damned parents ordered and paid for it.
If you can wrap your mind around just that much, then we'll have enough comon ground to start talking the same language. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was
made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions.
There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to
govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be
masters.
--Daniel Webster
"
Do YOU have any idea what he's talking about? I rather thought he said wilderness programs don't work, or at least aren't shown to work according to some government report, and that they are,at best, a waste of parental money. He said kids should get help in their local community. So why the hell attack him???
-
"If you invite me to the wilderness to teach me some survival skills, I can choose to build a fire or go home and cook on the stove." In your approach, yes. But the parallel is the child can choose to walk from the parental model and follow that of the drug abusing peer, as one example. The child can continue to blame others for all the ils they face and experience, rather than experience the inescapable result of not making a fire for warm food. I guess each instance involves choice, but one doesn't let the child run from reality.
Projection is a complex defense mechanism that is difficult for trained psychiatrists and psychologists to deal with. If you think it can be cured by tossing the patient into the wilderness and forcing them to learn fire making or suffer the consequences of eating cold food, you are an idiot.
A patient in this situation can just as easily project their plight onto those who forced them into the wilderness and the counselors making them eat cold food. Only this time it is not projection. They would be correct.
Your intended lesson runs along the lines of, "My actions lead to the consequence of being sent to wilderness. Learning to make a fire has taught me that my actions all have inescapable consequences."
The real lesson that will be internalized is, "My fucked up parents forced me into wilderness and made me eat cold food. Adults are all assholes."
-
On 2006-03-19 15:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-03-19 14:31:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Don't presume to know anthing about me. I might be homeless, using a library, a yuppie, or extreamly wealthy. The acrimony of your hysteria is a real turnoff to parents looking to this site to get information.
Hi Karen! :wave: Since we don't know anything about you, why don't you tell us more about yourself?"
Yeah, you do write a lot like Karen.
You aren't homeless, you aren't using a library, and you aren't extremely wealthy.
You're middle class, you went to college, you were in the college bound track in high school, you're a devotee of pop psychology (although you don't consider yourself one), and you had teachers who rewarded pompous writing. Your IQ is between 116 and 140---most likely around 126. You most likely scored between 1100 and 1250 on your SATs--1300, max. Although your intelligence is between above average and gifted, when you meet new people you are likely to assume you're smarter than they are--far more often than you should.
The college you went to was better than a community college and probably had competitive admissions, but wasn't Ivy League.
You're most likely between thirty and fifty. You're white collar, but you don't work in science or engineering.
You're a program parent or an ed con. From various bits of information from your post I can tell that you are not staff, a program owner, just a program relative, a former program kid, a journalist, or an interested bystander. That just leaves program parent, which other bits of information from you post confirms.
Word choices tell a lot about a person. If they didn't, characterization would be a whole lot harder.
Don't presume you don't give away a lot about yourself just by how you say what you say.
I won't necessarily have gotten all of that right, but I'm sure I pegged you on most of it.
The only other thing you could be is a professional writer, like me, who is (unlike me) pretending to be an anonymous program parent. Not likely.
Julie
"
Julie,
Have you just described yourself?
-
After 3 weeks of reading every post on this forum I've come to the conclusion, thought I don't always agree with him, that Dysfunction Junction is the only person with any sense. Deborah, Julie, Eudora, Three springs-- you are obnoxious and I'm not even a program person. You make me want to put my kid in one though.
-
::troll::
-
You make me want to put my kid in one though.
Please explain your logic behind this statement, because it eludes me. You are annoyed at anonymous internet posters, so in turn, you want to place your kid in a program? This is one the most ridiculous statements I've read on fornits.... and I've been reading this forum for years, not three weeks.
-
On 2006-03-25 21:27:00, Anonymous wrote:
"After 3 weeks of reading every post on this forum I've come to the conclusion, thought I don't always agree with him, that Dysfunction Junction is the only person with any sense. Deborah, Julie, Eudora, Three springs-- you are obnoxious and I'm not even a program person. You make me want to put my kid in one though."
::troll:: ::troll:: ::troll::
At least I sign my posts, bitch.
Julie
-
Class act.
-
Have you lost your ability to comphrehend the English language? I know I have a few typos in there but I just gave the best case arguement for not sending anyone to WC or BM. My arguement is based on existing research from an unbiased source, the surgeon generals report on residential treatment, verses their Wilderness Therapy Research which is published by highly biased industry journal and sucks for the reasons I stated. What better arguement could there be than to say to a parent that there isn't a shred of unbiased research that these places work. This is not based on my ancedotal experiences but on objective fact supported by the best unbiased literature written to date. Further, the marketing of these programs is obscene and unscrupulous.
-
You asked me to say a little about myself, now you tell me about yourself.
-
On 2006-03-25 13:56:00, Anonymous wrote:
Do YOU have any idea what he's talking about? I rather thought he said wilderness programs don't work, or at least aren't shown to work according to some government report, and that they are,at best, a waste of parental money. He said kids should get help in their local community. So why the hell attack him???
"
I was only commenting on that bit that I quoted. I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don't
agree with each other, but that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it
would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
--GW Büsh, CNN.com, December 18, 2000
-
On 2006-03-26 13:13:00, Anonymous wrote:
"You asked me to say a little about myself, now you tell me about yourself. "
Me? Told people, mostly. Here you go. Feel free to stop reading whenever you get bored. :lol:
Graduated from Georgia Tech with a BS in Psych. Degree program was intended to train further researchers and consultants for industry, not clinicians. Degree program focused on math and rigorous science, not clinical practice.
Since graduation in 1990, hobby of criminology and keeping up with the research on major mental illness.
39, mother of a ten year old with some special needs. Had problems navigating the bureaucracy with the school last year. Took a course that explained the bureaucracy and greatly improved working relationship with the school. Very lucky that this year the school is wonderful.
Sometime tutor of the occasional kid that needs it and would otherwise be outta luck.
Worked as a database programmer for five years.
New York Times bestselling author. I write science fiction. First two books have a female James Bond kind of feel. First book already in print, next two books on contract with Baen Books.
Moderate a web forum of same.
Brown belt in Tae Kwon Do. Three years of Hapkido, which means I know a lot of the joint locks used to restrain belligerently violent people.
Husband shoots highpower rifle competitively. I like to tag along to practice sessions at the range and plink with pistols. Favorite targets are the steel plates. They give a very satisfying *ping!* when you knock them over.
Suburban housewife---working from home writing books means I'm home to take care of Katie, which because of special needs she needs.
I also have bipolar disorder, with a heavy family history of it and related problems, and Katie has pediatric bipolar disorder, which is why I pay so much attention to the research.
Supporter of CABF (Children and Adolescent Bipolar Foundation).
Rape and abusive relationship survivor.
Enough of a wild child in high school that some of these program parents would have sent me to be locked up.
Advocate of quality, professional humane, safe, effective, and fairly priced mental health care in the least restrictive setting. For patients of any and all ages.
Believer of the medical model, with heavy genetic risk factors, in major mental illness.
There you have it---my life story.
Oh, and I also have a medium-sized dog named Polly who I dote on.
Julie
-
A little BM :lol: humor
Young Justin has a cursing problem, and his father is getting tired of it. So he decides to ask a shrink what to do. The shrink says, "Negative reinforcement.
Since Christmas is coming up, ask Justin what he wants from Santa. If he curses while he tells you his wish list, leave a pile of dog poop in place of each gift he requests."
Two days before Christmas, Justin's father asked him what he wants for Christmas. "I want a damn teddy bear lying beside me when I wake up. When I go downstairs, I want to see a damn train going around the damn tree. And when I go outside, I want to see a damn bike leaning up against the damn garage."
On Christmas morning, Justin wakes up and rolls into a pile of dog poop. Confused, he walks downstairs and sees another pile under the tree. He walks outside, looks at a huge pile of dog poop by the garage, and walks inside. His dad smiles and asks, "What did Santa bring you this year?"
Justin replies, "I think I got a damn dog, but I can't find the son of a bitch!"
-
The marketing of these programs is extremly dangerous because their are no inpectors and it is easy for a parent to make the mistake of sending a child into an unscrupulous program. Physical challanges will do harm to a percentage of those who go. Family therapy, and community mental health have evidence based research that suggest they are better alternatives.
Spot on commentary.
did spend some time reviewing the literature including reading the evidence that the Wilderness Therapy Association provided. There is not one study with a control group. So fundamentally they have absolutely no evidence that wilderness therapy changes behavior.
And again.
Now it's time to go on Woodbury's parent forum and tell them that the evidence suggests that the parents are wasting their money. I wonder how long it will be before he kicks me off.
Exactly one post.
Thanks for your thoughtful postings. It's nice to see some rational, reasonable, evidence-based statements about an industry that is run on lies, half-truths, mis- and disinformation, faith and hope.
All those industry claims and a dollar-fifty will get you on the A Train.
_________________
"Compassion is the basis of morality."
-Arnold Schopenhauer[ This Message was edited by: Dysfunction Junction on 2006-04-02 06:11 ]
-
Thank you Julie for responding to my request for information. From now on I will be using the moniker badpuppy. This website performs an invaluable service, because it is a wealth of information. Maia Szalavitz's outlook on BM and mine coincide about 100%. I am sure that we will be agreeing quite a bit. Best of luck with your daughter. The supreme court has made it much more difficult for parents to get children the services they need because the burden of proof is now on the parent to prove the need for services.
-
On 2006-04-02 08:14:00, Three Springs Waygookin wrote:
"Since when has logic had anything to do with what goes on over at struggling turkeys? The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics
is often very tolerant and human. But when fanatics are on top,
there is no limit to oppression.
--H.L. Mencken
"
Nothing! Lon's put a lockdown on criticism, any sort of critical thinking, or open discussion of any program, and instead its full of generalized nonsense, emotion and feeling based crap and punch-drunk buzzwords and boilerplate on the parts of the authority figures (no fornits links, as they bash programs without accountability!) and the victim-wannabe parents.
:roll:
-
Be fair to Lon, it is only appropriate that his diatribe against the use of punishment be placed next to his glowing 1994 review of Paradise Cove
-
Translation of Lon's editorial: "Ok now, everybody, from now on we call them wilderness programs! Boot camps don't exist in the private sector. Pass it on..."
Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.
--Mark Twain